I read the diary about the myth of certainty with disgust. The author predicated the whole premise on defending Obama based on one quote, the author of the diary, likes. The author chose not to include much in the way of biographical information about Reinhold Niebhur or any context for his quote. I'm not going to address because I don't care about Reinhold Niebhur, but I do care about the arguments being made. Lets look at the case made by someone else for avoiding compromise, centrism, and moderation.
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws.
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
This was written by a religious-type minister of some sorts. He now has a federal holiday named after him. Its kind of cool. I provided a few paragraphs than I want to focus on because its important to read the whole thing, and it would not be difficult to read the whole letter with the access people have to the tubes these days.
I want to focus on this section.
First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action";
Here Dr. King, yes that Dr. King, does not blame the inequalities in society on those who are extreme. Rather he blames it on those who say "wait, change will come, in time." President Obama is not President because he waited his turn. He is the President because he was bold enough to assert a relatively, young black man with little in the way of major government experience could earn the trust of the American people to be entrusted with the most sacred responsibility one can have which is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States from all threats, both foreign and domestic. He chose not to listen to the people who disagreed with his chances of winning and claimed nothing could stop the Hillary machine or that this country would never elect a black man. By his actions, he said they were wrong and he was right.
Success and fortune are predicated on action not on waiting. Dr. King accomplished very little from the pulpit of his church, but accomplished so much, by demanding people act, by standing on bridges during rush hour, and loudly saying wrong is still wrong.
I could be wrong about my interpretation and suspect that compromise is not inherently wrong. I'll paraphrase from a book I largely suspect is fictional or based on drug-induced hallucination (some people disagree with me and thats fine, but I still don't want to force kids to read it in public schools), there is a time and a season for everything. Compromise has a place, but not when we are holding the acquitted in indefinite attention because the President feels like it. There is no room for compromise on that issue and many others such as healthcare.
As a child and still today, I detest getting shots. I have to get my tetanus shot next summer, and I am dreading it this far out. My position as a child was to oppose the shot. I even hid in any exam room for an hour when I was three because I did not want to get vaccinated. Interestingly enough, despite the disagreement between my parents and myself about that vaccination, my parents were right even though I disagreed. There is certainty that I was wrong and they were right. When people are children and remain children or refuse to learn about an issue, then there opinion does not deserve the time of day.
To everyone who wants healthcare, call your representatives today, tomorrow, and the next day. Call your state parties. If you don't want healthcare demand compromise. I'll end this rant with a quote from Barry Goldwater, a man I probably disagree with almost everything on even if he was alive today. I do agree with him on this.
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!